Modern steels- can they get any better?

[sjbraun]

I have a fondness for steel frames. Given the current state of steel tubesets, is there much left that can be improved? The ride characteristics of modern steel frames (when made by experienced builders,) are already pretty dialed in. Weights are competitive with all but the lightest carbon frames. (For example, my steel Breadwinner B-Road with identical components weighs the same as my carbon fiber Diverge.) Are there developments in metallurgy that will improve steel frames further or do my steel frames (including a Hampsten, a Pegoretti, a Breadwinner and two CoMotion tandems,) represent the pinnacle of steel frame design?

[prototoast]

Areas where carbon frames currently have a big advantage are weight, aerodynamics, and tire clearance with short chainstays. Or, to generalize, improved tube shaping without dramatically increasing cost or weight is an area where steel still has a not of room to grow.

[vespasianus]

Originally Posted by sjbraun

I have a fondness for steel frames. Given the current state of steel tubesets, is there much left that can be improved? The ride characteristics of modern steel frames (when made by experienced builders,) are already pretty dialed in. Weights are competitive with all but the lightest carbon frames. (For example, my steel Breadwinner B-Road with identical components weighs the same as my carbon fiber Diverge.) Are there developments in metallurgy that will improve steel frames further or do my steel frames (including a Hampsten, a Pegoretti, a Breadwinner and two CoMotion tandems,) represent the pinnacle of steel frame design?

As someone who loves steel bikes, I doubt there is much development going on in the area of steel tubing. With that said, what builders, like those you mentioned and someone like Rob English, are doing with steel is pretty special.

[mattscq]

Originally Posted by prototoast

Areas where carbon frames currently have a big advantage are weight, aerodynamics, and tire clearance with short chainstays. Or, to generalize, improved tube shaping without dramatically increasing cost or weight is an area where steel still has a not of room to grow.

I would argue that carbon being composite also has the advantage of being tune-able and micro-adjustable using different layups. You can do so to a degree with blending steel tubing but carbon allows for a whole other dimension.

That said, as much of a carbon apologist as I am, I do realize that most of my bikes are steel and my newest bike was a custom steel build and I will admit that while it's not the lightest thing (despite getting pretty light parts for it), the experience of bespoke framebuilding is pretty special.

[bigbill]

I had the last steel Argonaut until I lost it in the Southwest Frameworks fire in 2015. Ben, the founder of Argonaut, switched to custom carbon because he felt the custom steel frame business had run its course. I have several steel bikes, including a Pegoretti, Merckx MXL, and two Nobilette GTs, but other than aesthetics and cool paint; tubing doesn't vary that much. My True Temper GT rides just like the 853 GT. The same guy made both bikes using fillet brazing instead of lugs. All my road bikes, except the Open I bought last year, won't clear much more than a fat 25mm. I run 32s on the Open, so it's not a good comparison between carbon and steel bikes.

I have steel gravel and mountain bikes built by Garro at Coconino. He has used a variety of tubing, but for his bikes, it comes down to the geometry and fabrication. I enjoy both bikes.

Lightweight is overrated, IMO. People obsess about component and frame weight while they carry an extra 20 pounds around the middle. The difference between a high-quality steel bike and a nice carbon one is about the weight of a full water bottle.

Carbon shines in tuning a ride to a frame size, aerodynamics, short chainstays, and in the case of my Open Min.d, ride quality.

[Louis]

The question in my mind is how much better do they need to be?

Yeah, shaped CF will be more aero than standard round-tube steel, and a bit lighter, but in the end, how significant are the differences and do they really matter. For me 99.99% of the time the answer is that steel is fine as it is today.

[KonaSS]

Originally Posted by Louis

how significant are the differences and do they really matter. For me 99.99% of the time the answer is that steel is fine as it is today.

For performance riding, the difference in aero between a round tubed bike and a current gen aero optimized road frame is big, and likely to get bigger as racing bikes continue to evolve. For the old thought experiment of could you still compete on a steel frame in the pro peloton? The answer is hell no! An aero expert recently estimated that a round tubed rim brake frame was giving up something like 30-40W at 28 mph. (Super interesting podcast here: https://escapecollective.com/podcast...es-jp-ballard/)

I would agree that weight doesn't really matter.

Now does it matter for you? I guess that becomes a question of do you compare about your performance compared to others?

[Peter P.]

Steel has reached its limit. Any claimed improvements will be marketing.

You will never build a steel frame as light and at the same time as stiff as carbon.

But that doesn't matter-the end product of a steel frame is so good that any performance disadvantages vs. carbon are measured with a microscope.

The good thing about steel frames is a regular craftsman can afford to the materials and equipment to build them.

[KonaSS]

Originally Posted by Peter P.

But that doesn't matter-the end product of a steel frame is so good that any performance disadvantages vs. carbon are measured with a microscope.

Not even close to true.

[benb]

Materials science is both expensive and difficult. It would be short sighted to say there’s nothing left to be done with steel.

But you’re not going to see the bicycle industry do anything meaningful. They’ll just piggy back on something new if another industry discovers something and does all the work.

Especially not in the current climate where so many big bike companies have excess inventory and worries.

[Hilltopperny]

Steel is probably at its height IMHO. The right tubes, manipulation and geometry can create a high performance bike and the weight is comparable enough for most of us not chasing the extremes. In a conversation with Chris Bishop yesterday he mentioned how the new Columbus Omnicron tubing is lightweight, has a higher tensile strength than 953 and is easier to work with.

I don't average 28mph or race bikes often and prefer the ride of a high end steel bike. My road bikes are rim brake and steel or a steel carbon mix. The Pegoretti Round and Speedvagen Superlight both built up to 16lbs or less depending on the wheelset used while my Waterford probably weighs at least 5lbs more!

Both the Pegoretti and Speedvagen are high performance bicycles. I am faster on these over the course of a ride than a carbon aero wunderbike probably due to the comfort and fit they provide for me. I also prefer the aesthetics of these bikes. I think I am faster over long distances on my 21lb Waterford due to comfort and my ride style as well.



All this being said all of my MTB's are carbon. I prefer it for riding single track and downhill. I have a couple of carbon gravel bikes as well, but prefer my steel and titanium bikes for that most of the time! Every time I try out a new carbon wunderbike I feel very fast for the first few miles, but am never comfortable over the long haul on them.




Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by KonaSS

I would agree that weight doesn't really matter.

Now does it matter for you? I guess that becomes a question of do you compare about your performance compared to others?

I think you meant "care" above. If so then the answer for me is no. So with that in mind and my fun game of comparing all my bikes to each other I can't say I've found any advantage to any material. Of course I'm just a mere mortal, out for fun, bike rider. My fastest (if that matters) is still my heaviest and a mix of materials. The old Softride made of steel with the C.F. (is it really?) beam has yet to be bested by any of my bikes.

For the OP, I'm sure there is more to still come on the steel front. Not that a rider like me needs more from it. I'm what holds back all my bikes, not the bikes holding me back.

[deluz]

Another steel fan here. I am currently in the beginning of ordering another one.
I think steel has hit its limit. Wall thickness is down to 0.4mm can't really get any thinner. There is Spirit HSS with shaped tubing. I am not sure if that is to make a stiffer frame, aero or just aesthetics but I don't need any of those things. Consider that a carbon Aethos frame is 585g and a really light steel is 1500g that is a 2 lb difference. But I would still rather the 17 lb custom steel bike over the 15 lb carbon bike. It is amazing with all the changes in material technology that a material that has been used for so long in its same basic form is still relevant and desired.

[AngryScientist]

I guess you have to decide what's important.

Aero doesnt matter at all to some people, like me. I ride alone 95% of the time, and I ride to enjoy myself, get exercise, see new places and new roads. If I'm giving up xxx watts at 28mph it simply doesnt matter, and if I'm going 28mph, I'm probably coasting downhill.

What matters to me is a bike is comfortable, fits well, easy to maintain and looks good (to me). I think steel is as good as it's going to get and up to the builder to use it according to his design ethos.

If we look at what people like English are doing with steel for example, it seems to me, that lot's of things are possible with the materials that are available.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

I guess you have to decide what's important.

Aero doesnt matter at all to some people, like me. I ride alone 95% of the time, and I ride to enjoy myself, get exercise, see new places and new roads. If I'm giving up xxx watts at 28mph it simply doesnt matter, and if I'm going 28mph, I'm probably coasting downhill.

What matters to me is a bike is comfortable, fits well, easy to maintain and looks good (to me). I think steel is as good as it's going to get and up to the builder to use it according to his design ethos.

If we look at what people like English are doing with steel for example, it seems to me, that lot's of things are possible with the materials that are available.

I'm not an engineer, so perhaps there are some advances still possible with steel. Rob English seems to be on the cutting edge of things. But what cost will those advances incur? Carbon bikes can be made much more "aero" but most of them look like crap. Do you really want a steel bike with dropped stays and weird looking tubing? I don't.